Return of the MiG-29K

[Alfa]

http://secure.simmarket.com/iris-mig-29k-naval-fulcrum.phtml

 

http://www.flatpyramid.com/3d-3d_models-vehicles-aircraft-alien-mig-29k-fulcrum-p15160.html

 

Should be nice to add into LOMAC/DCS :noexpression:

 

First I should perhaps explain my eye-wink in response to Wag's thread title. Back when lock-on was in development some 10 years ago, I was a little upset that the MiG-29K wasn't ported over from the Flanker 2.5 title and I asked Matt whether we could expect to see it re-introduced at a later point - he replied that he didn't believe that the MiG-29K would ever see service with the Russian navy and because of that a "Su-33M" would be a better bet. I made the counter argument that since the Indian navy order for the MiG-29K would fund final development/production setup, there was a possibility that the Russian navy would acquire it as well......which is exactly what happened :) .

 

Anyway, about your links;

 

The first one is for a payware add-on for MSFS, so I don't know why you posted that.

 

The second link is to a MiG-29K model by a modeller called PerspectX - the model he custom-made.....for me :D . My intention was to use it for a new version of my old MiG-29K mod, but unfortunately it turned out quite flawed, so I gave up on it.

[Alfa]

In the matter of required space on the carrier deck it's not quite true. Suprisingly, the Su-33 (although a bit bigger) takes up a bit LESS room on deck and in the hangar - than his counterpart MiG-29K.

 

With wings and tailplanes folded, the Su-33 spans circa 7.4m - less than the original MiG-29K (probably 9.41/9.47 also) - about 7.8m - 8.3 with missiles. Moreover, Su-33 has a shortened (folding) tailboom, shorter fins, folding nose probe. All of thiese clever features designed to give it a smaller 'footprint' than the rival MiG-29K.

 

I am not sure that you are right that a "folded-up" Su-33 takes less space than the MiG-29K, but you are right that its about the same. However, the effort by Sukhoi was not to give the Su-33 a smaller footprint than the MiG-29K, but simply not to exceed it.....thereby removing an obvious argument against the Su-33.

 

It's worth to mention that Su-27K was selected years before over the MiG-29K cause the Su-27K was a less radical redesign than the MiG.

 

......system wise yes(since the Su-33 systems are virtually the same as those of the Su-27). The airframe re-design from Su-27 to Su-33 was quite radical though, but then that had already been completed and passed state trials before the break-up of the Soviet Union. So I think you are right that the main reason for selecting the Su-33 over the MiG-29K was the daunting prospect of dealing with the advanced systems of the MiG-29K in a post-Soviet Russia where funds for military acquisitions just weren't available.

 

Su-33 also had lower minimum control speed.

 

Yes IIRC it was 240 km/h for the Su-33, while it was 250 km/h for the MiG-29K.

 

It's also true that we cannot really compare the ageing Su-27K/Su-33 (although slightly overhauled & modernized in KnAAPO in years 2002-2003 with SPO-32 RWR and SIO-1 signal information system added) with the 'new' MiG-29K/KUB, which is "generation" ahead. But imagine if the Su-33 someday were to be given similar upgrade like Su-27SM...

 

....or similar to the Su-27KUB :) - the Su-27SM may be a great step forward in comparison with the initial Su-27, but the upgrade still involves an upgrade to the old N001 radar, while the Su-27KUB prototypes were tested with the Zhuk-MS and later the Zhuk-MSF(phased array) radars :) .

 

Anyway, although the economy of Russia is very different today than it was back in the early 90' ies, I think the recent announcement to go for the MiG-29K/KUB still has a lot to do with cost - the situation with the Su-33 and MiG-29K is almost the reversed of what it was last time around.....now it is the MiG-29K that is the most cost effective solution because the development/production cost is shared with India and spread over more units, while further development of the Su-33 would have to be carried by Russia alone.....unless China has serious plans with the Varyag :) .

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Ohh, I got GGTharos going ... :smilewink: :smilewink:

 

I did not talk about which of the two aircraft carriers concepts can project more power. Thus your comment is off the mark.

 

So? Can the Kuznetzov generate the sortie rate and striking power that the nuclear powered carrier does? No.

Not at all, in fact. It's closer to a (better equipped) marine expeditionary support carrier, not that this was ever its mission - the USN's carriers are all about projection of power. The Kuz has just one mission, protecting its anti-ship fleet.

 

You made my point. Thanks.

 

No, it was never designed to. Its naval counterpart was the F-14. ;) But strictly speaking, the F-15 has more TWR than a flanker - so you tell me, do you think it could take off from the much longer deck of a US naval aircraft carrier, nominally loaded? There have been examples of F-18C's taking off without afterburner, too (still a cat-shot, of course).

Can a Su-27 take off from a carrier? ;)

 

Thus, it took upgrading the FA-18 to "eat" Su-33? All right, I'll take that. Of course, Su-33 would eat FA-18 if it is upgraded to the latest specs.

 

Do you realize that an F-18E will eat a Su-33 for breakfast? The 29K has better chances - but okay, let's go with more contemporary things, before the 18E.

 

Well, who is "we"? I did not know that you are "us". Are you?

 

We have F-14Bs and D's, which will outrange the Su-33.

 

Ha, haaaaa, I can't believe GGTharos is now supporting Soviet era tactics. NUMBERS!!! Well, you are right. Five FA-18C will defeat one Su-33.

 

We have F-18C's, which although inferior in some respects (range, speed, endurance, smaller radar) were equipped with an adequate SPJ and there could be MORE of them in the air than Su-33s. They didn't need to do the A2G/ASuW role either, they could leave this to the A-6's, so overall the Su-33 was well out-numbered.

 

In my opinion, Sukhoi is in much better financial and marketing position. Russian government announced some time ago that it will buy MiG-29K's just to assist MiG in surviving these tough financial times. MiG 29K is just fine for carrier operations, however, if updated, Su-33 would be superior platform because it can carry more ordinance and possibly have larger, more powerful radar. We are talking two different class airplanes here.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP!

Edited October 16, 2009 by =4c= Hajduk Veljko

[GGTharos]

... so, today, instead of writing up a big post to respond to you, I'll let you figure out the corrections to your own flawed thinking. ;)

[Vekkinho]

^^^^

Oooh, you two!

 

Let us turn this thread the way it's supposed to go, let's discuss MiG-29K/KUB!

 

OK let's see, why do we have MiG-29K/KUB back in the naval business, the answer is very simple, it's been tested already by Indian Navy unlike the Su-27K (33) that saw no service outside CCCP or Russia and very little within!

 

Even today, Naval Flankers rarely operate, and if they do they operate from a concrete runway in Severomorsk as the Kuz usually rests anchored or drydocked for overhaul. In late 90s all Su-27K were grounded by lack of spares. There's like 20-ish Su-33s which were overhauled few years ago but not upgraded. Those Flankers are not being upgraded like the MiG simply because there was no export and are in same technical upgrade state as in 1987 when entering service.

 

The other and probably the greatest reason of MiGs instead of Sukhoi is the fact that MiG-29KUB has entered a serial production (for India) and Su-27 KUB project was scrapped in early 2000.

 

Naval ops pilot training is possible for MiG but not for Sukhoi!

[topol-m]

^^^ In the light of the ongoing military cooperation between these two countries that seems logical.

[Vekkinho]

^^^^

Exactly!

[Kenan]

Hey Alfa, do you still have that Mig-29k mod lying around somewhere?

Does it work in FC and can you land the K on Kuz with it?

 

Thx.

[Alfa]

Hey Alfa, do you still have that Mig-29k mod lying around somewhere?

 

Yeah I think I still have it uploaded - let me get back to you on that :) .

 

Does it work in FC and can you land the K on Kuz with it?

 

Well it was made for V1.02, but it should not be too much of a problem to convert it to FC. Its just a matter of transfering the meinit entry - there were a couple of issues with some weapon CLSIDs that were changed from 1.02 to FC though, but thats easily fixed.

 

Unfortunately the Lock-on code for the MiG-29K doesn't provide control of hook when its made flyable, so landing on the Kuz is problematic :) . Initially the mod was just meant to add the MiG-29K to the "sceneary" as an AI entry, since everthing(carrier landings, aerial refuellings and radar guided ASMs) works for the AI - I just included the flyable bit because it was possible, but to be honest this part is really too restricted to be interesting.

[Vekkinho]

Alfa, you're talking Navy Supermod right?!! If so, I can send it to anyone interested!

 

Do you have a 3D model of MiG-29K made by PerspectX?! Can U release it?!

 

Thanks!

[Alfa]

Alfa, you're talking Navy Supermod right?!!

 

No I was talking about my original MiG-29K mod for V1.02, but you are right that there is a mod called Navy Supermod made by Britglider, which among a lot of other things, also includes my old MiG-29K mod.

 

I remember that Britglider made the earlier mentioned weapon's CLSID conversions to make it FC compatible, so thats another option :) .

 

Do you have a 3D model of MiG-29K made by PerspectX?! Can U release it?!

 

Yes I have the model, but I cannot make it public without converting it to Lom format(due to shared copyright) and that would require all the animations to be made in order for it to work in the sim......and some of the flaws with the model prevents me from making those without re-modelling varies parts(such as landing gear), which in turn just isn't worth the effort because the model as such is too inaccurate.

 

Thats why I gave up on it Vekkinho.

[Vekkinho]

OK too bad about it Alfa but on the other hand now with MiG-29K being selected by Russian Navy IRL there's a chance of a DCS:MiG-29K too!

 

:music_whistling:

 

Wags?!

[herr_LaSk]

Surely this would be an excellent opportunity for ED. An aircraft carrier is very cramped space, and a conventional training sim takes up far to much room, making a desktop sim ideal. Think about it, when the kuznetsov is out on a mission, the pilots would normally have to train repeatedly with the real aircraft in order to stay in shape, burning tons of expensive fuel, not to mention the risk of accidents. Wouldn't it be brilliant if instead every pilot could sitt around on his own lapptop training over LAN with his buddies with EDs sim. Would save the russian navy a lot of time and money, and potentialy give us flight sim nerds DCS: Mig 29k :)

[topol-m]

^^^ Playing on the laptop is not quite like flying the real thing ;) It`s like looking at Playboy magazine compared to ban@&%g the honey.

Edited October 20, 2009 by topol-m

[CyBerkut]

^^^ Playing on the laptop is not quite like flying the real thing ;) It`s like looking at Playboy magazine compared to ban@&%g the honey.

 

Well... THAT alternative has served many sailors well while at sea... :music_whistling:, so you sort of made a point for herr_LaSk there! ;)

[mikoyan]

Do you guys have any info on the mig-29 specifications, like weight ratios aoa limits, weapon loads etc.

I wonder because the mig-29K has a bigger wing than the mig-29 and it also has bigger tail sections coupled with a new flight control system, it also looks more maneuverable than the regular mig-29. There is a video in youtube where it does a high AOA roll which is very hard to do on lock-on, and I have never seen an older mig-29 doing it.

 

I also wonder how does the the mig-29k fairs against an f-18 Super-hornet in terms of maneuverability?

[Vekkinho]

Mikoyan, here's some info, however can't call it accurate as they differ a lot:

 

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/MiG-29K.html

http://migavia.ru/eng/military_e/MiG_29_K_KUB_e.htm

 

Specifications

Crew: One

Length: 17.37 m (57 ft)

Wingspan: 11.4 m (37 ft 3 in)

Height: 4.73 m (15 ft 6 in)

Wing area: 38 m (409 ft)

Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)

Loaded weight: 16,800 kg (37,000 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 21,000 kg (46,300 lb)

Powerplant: 2 Klimov RD-33K afterburning turbofans, 86.4 kN (20,725 lbf) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 2,445 km/h (1,518 mph)

Range: 700 km combat, 2,900 km ferry (430 mi / 1,800 mi)

Service ceiling: 18,013 m / 59 060 ft (59,100 ft)

Rate of climb: 330 m/s (65,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 442 kg/m (90.5 lb/ft)

Thrust/weight: 1.05

[Alfa]

OK too bad about it Alfa but on the other hand now with MiG-29K being selected by Russian Navy IRL there's a chance of a DCS:MiG-29K too!

 

Fingers crossed! :)

 

Anyway, I haven't given up on doing something with the MiG-29K mod as such - I just need a better model for the purpose.

 

I have taken up 3D modelling myself recently, but I am still learning and I am afraid it will be some time before I am ready to take on an aircraft model :) .

[Alfa]

mikoyan,

 

Do you guys have any info on the mig-29 specifications, like weight ratios aoa limits, weapon loads etc.

I wonder because the mig-29K has a bigger wing than the mig-29 and it also has bigger tail sections coupled with a new flight control system, it also looks more maneuverable than the regular mig-29. There is a video in youtube where it does a high AOA roll which is very hard to do on lock-on, and I have never seen an older mig-29 doing it.

 

I also wonder how does the the mig-29k fairs against an f-18 Super-hornet in terms of maneuverability?

 

I believe the MiG-29K video you are refering to features the second 9-31 prototype(bort # 312) - i.e. the old version from 1990. There are differences between the specs of this and the new MiG-29K(9-41)/MiG-29KUB(9-47) versions ordered by India and now also by the Russian navy.

 

The wings appear to have the same span(11,99 m), but there are differences in the aerodynamic design of the wings - also while the 9-31 had an analogue quadruplex fly-by-wire system, the new 9-41 has a digital Triplex FBW. But I don't know how these differences affect flight characteristics in terms of combat performance though - I suspect the changes to the wing design has more to do with controlability in connection with low speed carrier approaches.

[Alfa]

Mikoyan, here's some info, however can't call it accurate as they differ a lot:

 

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/MiG-29K.html

http://migavia.ru/eng/military_e/MiG_29_K_KUB_e.htm

 

Specifications

Crew: One

Length: 17.37 m (57 ft)

Wingspan: 11.4 m (37 ft 3 in)

Height: 4.73 m (15 ft 6 in)

Wing area: 38 m (409 ft)

Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)

Loaded weight: 16,800 kg (37,000 lb)

Max takeoff weight: 21,000 kg (46,300 lb)

Powerplant: 2 Klimov RD-33K afterburning turbofans, 86.4 kN (20,725 lbf) each

Performance

Maximum speed: 2,445 km/h (1,518 mph)

Range: 700 km combat, 2,900 km ferry (430 mi / 1,800 mi)

Service ceiling: 18,013 m / 59 060 ft (59,100 ft)

Rate of climb: 330 m/s (65,000 ft/min)

Wing loading: 442 kg/m (90.5 lb/ft)

Thrust/weight: 1.05

 

Vekkinho the second link is to the official site of RSK MIG, so the specs listed there are accurate for the new 9-41 and 9-47 versions.

 

The specs you listed I believe are supposed to be for the old 9-31 version, but they are not corrrect:

 

The wing span is 11.99 m

The wing area is 41.6 m2

The empty weight is 12,700 kg

The normal T/O weight is 17,700 kg

The max T/O weight is 22,400 kg

 

The engine(Klimov RD-33K) performance sounds about right - IIRC its some 8,800 kgf, which would translate to the figure given in lbf.....i.e. some 500 kgf more than the standard RD-33 engine(8,300 kgf) of the "baseline" MiG-29.

 

This is for the 9-31 and if you compare the above with the specs given for the new 9-41 on the Migavia site, you can see that there are slight differences - e.g. the take-off weights are slightly higher and so is the engine power of the new RD-33MK.

Edited October 21, 2009 by Alfa

[Vekkinho]

Yeah, the specs list I wrote are related to the 9-31 and are Wikipedia figures. So highly questionable data...

 

But here's a nice video:

[Kenan]

Anyway, I haven't given up on doing something with the MiG-29K mod as such - I just need a better model for the purpose.

 

I don't see any reason why the next FC patch (if there will be one) shouldn't include some code changes (arrestor hook) that would allow your 29K mod to land on a carrier (player controlled).

 

Why don't you pull some strings at ED?:D

[Vekkinho]

MiG-29K training simulator at MAKS 2009.

[topol-m]

^^^ Wow :joystick:

[EvilBivol-1]

Oh mention the MiG-29K and guess who turns up online all of a sudden?! :D

 

In the meanwhile, a Russian MoD contract to upgrade the Su-33 has been announced. Interesting times...